West Africa

March 2020 to September 2020

IPC 2.0 Acute Food Insecurity Phase

1: Minimal
2: Stressed
3: Crisis
4: Emergency
5: Famine
Not mapped
Would likely be at least one phase worse without current or programmed humanitarian assistance
FEWS NET classification is IPC-compatible. IPC-compatible analysis follows key IPC protocols but does not necessarily reflect the consensus of national food security partners.

IPC 2.0 Acute Food Insecurity Phase

1: Minimal
2: Stressed
3+: Crisis or higher
Would likely be at least one phase worse without current or programmed humanitarian assistance
FEWS NET classification is IPC-compatible. IPC-compatible analysis follows key IPC protocols but does not necessarily reflect the consensus of national food security partners.
FEWS NET Remote Monitoring countries use a colored outline to represent the highest IPC classification in areas of concern.

IPC 2.0 Acute Food Insecurity Phase

Presence countries:
1: Minimal
2: Stressed
3: Crisis
4: Emergency
5: Famine
National Parks/Reserves
Remote monitoring
countries:
1: Minimal
2: Stressed
3+: Crisis or higher
Would likely be at least one phase worse without current or programmed humanitarian assistance
Not mapped
FEWS NET classification is IPC-compatible. IPC-compatible analysis follows key IPC protocols but does not necessarily reflect the consensus of national food security partners. FEWS NET only maps the Eastern half of DRC.
FEWS NET Remote Monitoring countries use a colored outline to represent the highest IPC classification in areas of concern.

CIF 2.0 Fase de Insegurida d Alimentaria Aguda

1: Minimo
2: Acentuada
3: Crisis
4: Emergencia
5: Hambruna
Sin mapa
Se estima que seria al menos una fase peor sin ayuda humanitaria actual o programada
La manera de clasificación que utiliza FEWS NET es compatible con la CIF. Un análisisque es compatible con la CIF sigue los protocolos fundamentales de CIF pero nonecesariamente refleja el consenso de los socios nacionales en materia de seguridad alimentaria.

CIF 2.0 Fase de Insegurida d Alimentaria Aguda

1: Minimo
2: Acentuada
3+: Crisis o peor
Se estima que seria al menos una fase peor sin ayuda humanitaria actual o programada
La manera de clasificación que utiliza FEWS NET es compatible con la CIF. Un análisisque es compatible con la CIF sigue los protocolos fundamentales de CIF pero nonecesariamente refleja el consenso de los socios nacionales en materia de seguridad alimentaria.
Para los países de Monitoreo Remoto, FEWS NET utiliza un contorno de color en el mapa CIF que representa la clasificación más alta de CIF en las áreas de preocupación.

CIF 2.0 Fase de Insegurida d Alimentaria Aguda

Países presenciales:
1: Minimo
2: Acentuada
3: Crisis
4: Emergencia
5: Hambruna
Parques y reservas
Países de monitoreo remoto:
1: Minimo
2: Acentuada
3+: Crisis o peor
Se estima que seria al menos una fase peor sin ayuda humanitaria actual o programada
Sin mapa
La manera de clasificación que utiliza FEWS NET es compatible con la CIF. Un análisis que es compatible con la CIF sigue los protocolos fundamentales de CIF pero no necesariamente refleja el consenso de los socios nacionales en materia de seguridad alimentaria. FEWS NET presenta el mapa para el este de la RDC solamente.
Para los países de Monitoreo Remoto, FEWS NET utiliza un contorno de color en el mapa CIF que representa la clasificación más alta de CIF en las áreas de preocupación.

IPC 2.0 Phase d'Insécurité Alimentaire Aiguë

1: Minimale
2: Stress
3: Crise
4: Urgence
5: Famine
Non cartographié
Serait probablement pire, au moins une phase, sans l'assistance humanitaire en cours ou programmée
La manière de classification que FEWS NET utilise est compatible avec l’IPC. Une analyse qui est compatible avec l’IPC suit les principaux protocoles de l’IPC mais ne reflète pas nécessairement le consensus des partenaires nationaux en matière de sécurité alimentaire.

IPC 2.0 Phase d'Insécurité Alimentaire Aiguë

1: Minimale
2: Stress
3+: Crise ou pire
Serait probablement pire, au moins une phase, sans l'assistance humanitaire en cours ou programmée
La manière de classification que FEWS NET utilise est compatible avec l’IPC. Une analyse qui est compatible avec l’IPC suit les principaux protocoles de l’IPC mais ne reflète pas nécessairement le consensus des partenaires nationaux en matière de sécurité alimentaire.
Pour les pays suivis à distance par FEWS NET, un contour coloré est utilisé pour représenter la classification de l’IPC la plus élevée dans les zones de préoccupation.

IPC 2.0 Phase d'Insécurité Alimentaire Aiguë

Pays de présence:
1: Minimale
2: Stress
3: Crise
4: Urgence
5: Famine
Parcs et Réserves
Pays suivis à distance:
1: Minimale
2: Stress
3+: Crise ou pire
Serait probablement pire, au moins une phase, sans l'assistance humanitaire en cours ou programmée
Non cartographié
La manière de classification que FEWS NET utilise est compatible avec l’IPC. Une analyse qui est compatible avec l’IPC suit les principaux protocoles de l’IPC mais ne reflète pas nécessairement le consensus des partenaires nationaux en matière de sécurité alimentaire. FEWS NET ne cartographie que l’est de la RDC.
Pour les pays suivis à distance par FEWS NET, un contour coloré est utilisé pour représenter la classification de l’IPC la plus élevée dans les zones de préoccupation.

CIF 2.0 Fase de Insegurança Alimentar Aguda Baseado

1: Minima
2: Stress
3: Crise
4: Emergência
5: Fome
Não mapeado
Poderia ser pior sem a assistência humanitária em vigor ou programad
A maneira de classificação que utiliza FEWS NET é compatível com a CIF. A análise compatível com a CIF segue os protocolos fundamentais da CIF mas não necessariamente reflete o consenso dos parceirosnacionais com respeito a segurança alimentar.

CIF 2.0 Fase de Insegurança Alimentar Aguda Baseado

1: Minima
2: Stress
3+: Crise ou pior
Poderia ser pior sem a assistência humanitária em vigor ou programad
A maneira de classificação que utiliza FEWS NET é compatível com a CIF. A análise compatível com a CIF segue os protocolos fundamentais da CIF mas não necessariamente reflete o consenso dos parceirosnacionais com respeito a segurança alimentar.
Para os países de Monitoreo Remoto, FEWS NET utiliza um contorno de cor no mapa CIF para representar a classificação mais alta da CIF nas áreas de preocupação.

CIF 2.0 Fase de Insegurança Alimentar Aguda Baseado

Países com presença:
1: Minima
2: Stress
3: Crise
4: Emergência
5: Fome
Parques e reservas
Países sem presença:
1: Minima
2: Stress
3+: Crise ou pior
Poderia ser pior sem a assistência humanitária em vigor ou programad
Não mapeado
A maneira de classificação que utiliza FEWS NET é compatível com a CIF. A análise compatível com a CIF segue os protocolos fundamentais da CIF mas não necessariamente reflete o consenso dos parceiros nacionais com respeito a segurança alimentar. FEWS NET mapeia apenas a metade leste da RDC.
Para os países de Monitoreo Remoto, FEWS NET utiliza um contorno de cor no mapa CIF para representar a classificação mais alta da CIF nas áreas de preocupação.

March - May 2020

Résultats estimés les plus probables de la sécurité alimentaire, mars a mai 2020: La plupart de la region est en Minimal (Phase 1 de l'IPC), sauf que zones de Mali, Niger, Tchad, et Nigeria qui sont en Stresse (Phase 2 de l'IPC), et Mauritanie, Burkina Faso, nord-est Nigeria, l'ouest de Cameroun, et la Republique Centreafricaine qui sont en Crise (Phase 3 de l'IPC). Partie du nord-est de Nigeria reste en Urgence (Phase 4 de l'IPC)

June - September 2020

Résultats estimés les plus probables de la sécurité alimentaire, juin a septembre 2020: La plupart de la region est en Minimal (Phase 1 de l'IPC), sauf que zones de Mali, Niger, Tchad, et Nigeria qui sont en Stresse (Phase 2 de l'IPC), et Mauritanie, Burkina Faso, nord-est Nigeria, l'ouest de Cameroun, parties de Mali, parties de Niger, et la Republique Centreafricaine qui sont en Crise (Phase 3 de l'IPC). Partie du nord-est de Nigeria reste en Urgence (Phase 4 de l'IPC)

IPC v3.0 Acute Food Insecurity Phase

Presence countries:
1: Minimal
2: Stressed
3: Crisis
4: Emergency
5: Famine
Remote monitoring
countries:
1: Minimal
2: Stressed
3+: Crisis or higher
Would likely be at least one phase worse without
current or programmed humanitarian assistance
Concentration of displaced people – hover over maps to view food security phase classifications for camps in Nigeria.
FEWS NET classification is IPC-compatible. IPC-compatible analysis follows key IPC protocols but does not necessarily reflect the consensus of national food security partners.
FEWS NET Remote Monitoring countries use a colored outline to represent the highest IPC classification in areas of concern.
Key Messages
  • Off-season harvests continue to improve food availability and household incomes except in conflict areas where they are lower than average. In the Liptako-Gourma area, continued insecurity continues to lead to an increase in IDPs, deterioration or even loss of livelihoods and pressure on the resources of the host populations. Limited access to certain areas such as northern Burkina Faso, western Niger and parts of northeastern Nigeria by humanitarians, compromises assistance to the population.

  • The low availability of pasture locally in the pastoral areas of Mali, Niger, Burkina Faso and Chad is aggravated by insecurity, which greatly hampers livestock movements. Poor grazing conditions remains a concern in western Mauritania and northern Senegal for the third consecutive year, leading to increased pressure on resources in western Mali and an intensification of transhumant movements to Senegal by Mauritanian herds. In Burkina Faso, Mauritania, and Niger, feed expenditures for livestock have increased significantly. This situation, in addition to insecurity and looting, is leading to livestock destocking by households in northern Burkina Faso.

  • Market supply remains stable at above-average levels with large carryover stocks. Demand remains below average, except in areas of deficit and insecurity. Markets remain disrupted in the Great Lake Chad basin, Tibesti region and Liptako-Gourma region. The closure of Nigeria's land borders continues to impede internal and regional trade, mainly with Niger, Cameroon, and Benin.

  • Prices of local staple foods are below average except in areas with deficits and/or impacted by insecurity and armed conflict. Supply will remain sufficient to meet demand, except in the areas mentioned above where the functioning of markets is atypical. In Nigeria, insecurity in the north-east will continue to restrict trade. Prices will rise seasonally from March onwards as household stocks are depleted. The closure of Nigeria's land borders will put pressure on demand for cereals from Niger to Benin and the central basin. Cereal prices will be below or near average but are expected to be above last year's levels in several regional markets.

  • Most of the region will remain in Minimal (IPC Phase 1) until September 2020 and Stressed (IPC Phase 2) for some. However, the persistence of insecurity and armed conflict in the region will continue to worsen household food security conditions. As a result, Crisis (IPC Phase 3) will prevail until September in the Tillabéry region of Niger, the Centre-North and Sahel regions and the provinces of Loroum, Komondjari and Gnagna in Burkina Faso, the Western Sahel and Liptako Gourma in Mali, the eastern CAR and the English-speaking regions of Cameroon. Households in north-eastern Nigeria affected by the Boko Haram conflict continue to depend on humanitarian assistance for access to food and remain in Crisis (IPC Phase 3) and Emergency (IPC Phase 4) particularly in Borno State and secondarily Yobe State. In adjacent areas that remain inaccessible to humanitarian actors, the food situation would be similar or worse.

Markets & Trade

Price Bulletin

Livelihoods

About FEWS NET

The Famine Early Warning Systems Network is a leading provider of early warning and analysis on food insecurity. Created by USAID in 1985 to help decision-makers plan for humanitarian crises, FEWS NET provides evidence-based analysis on some 28 countries. Implementing team members include NASA, NOAA, USDA, USGS, and CHC-UCSB, along with Chemonics International Inc. and Kimetrica. Read more about our work.

Link to United States Agency for International Development (USAID)Link to the United States Geological Survey's (USGS) FEWS NET Data PortalLink to U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
Link to National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Earth ObservatoryLink to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) National Weather Service, Climage Prediction CenterLink to the Climate Hazards Center - UC Santa BarbaraLink to KimetricaLink to Chemonics